Exclusion for hair?(41 Posts)
I need some help with an issue regarding my sons hair. He was isolated today and was not permitted to attend any of his lessons. Reason for this was because his hair was too short.
I did not get a letter from the school or a note given to my son. I checked the school's policies and their code of conduct and there is nothing regarding hair, only in regards to uniform and female student's wearing make-up and jewelry.
Can they do this? Legally?
How short - skinhead? Most schools do mention extreme hairstyles in their bumf
I think his treatment sounds unfair - but certainly not illegal. If there is no policy in place on the hair style pupils may or may not have, then there should have been no grounds to punish him on. What do they intend to do for the next 2/3 weeks until his hair grows?!
If he had work given to him in isolation, then the school were fulfilling their obligation to 'educate' him.
I would have a word with his Head of Year, and explain that you were unaware that his hairstyle was not permitted at school, and ask if you can have a copy of that particular policy as you were unable to locate on their website! Therefore ensuring the same mistake doesn't happen again.
The punishment has already happened, there isn't a lot to be gained from getting too upset about it now.
Mmm it depends. How short? If suede like then school have a point.
I think legally they can put pupils into isolation for any reason (as long as they are still being educated).
How long is this likely to go on for- until his hair is deemed a suitable length?
It wasn't skinhead short, although it may seem like that. His hair grows very quickly so opted for him to have a short haircut, less than number 1 on the clippers.
Problem is as well, he had it cut on Sunday, went to school on Monday. Nothing was mentioned to him. He actually told me that teachers complimented on his hair. Then today he gets isolation???
He was in a room unsupervised with older boys. He was bullied previously by older children a couple of years above him last year.
Isolation until suitable length, that is what my son tells me. But I never got a letter, phone call, or anything. I called straight after I found out and left a message and nothing. Thanks for the responses everyone.
I'd ask for a meeting, be compliant. It doesn't sound as if it was done provocatively- everyone comes out of the hairdressers 'wrong' sometimes and this seems unfair, especially as he's being bullied.
Ask for clarification. Why was it ok on Monday but not today? If a policy is in place then the rule should be constant. How long is "a reasonable length", that's very subjective.
I am not sure what the reasonable length is. I have looked at their policies and there is nothing. My argument is, why was it ok on Monday but not on Tuesday? My DS is mixed race, with a light complexion. School is out in Essex and is a quiet and generally well mannered boy. Also he had his hair that short before.
By no means am I racist or anything. But there are Afro-American children in the school with hair shorter than his. Where is the equality in that?
Hang on, how can anyone have hair shorter than his if it is less than a number 1? That is pretty much bald as a coot in my book. Definitely 'skinhead short'.
My Mum is a hairdresser and says she used to have a 0.5 grade blade and used to describe it as being equivilent to leaving one days hair growth on the head. Her Grade 1 blade leaves about one weeks hair growth. So, to be honest, less than grade one sounds extreme to me and I can understand why it might, if there is one, breach a school haircut policy.
"It wasn't skinhead short, although it may seem like that. His hair grows very quickly so opted for him to have a short haircut, less than number 1 on the clippers."
What do you describe as skinhead short then?
The first thing to say is that if son is in school but in isolation then he has not been excluded. He is in what is commonly called internal exclusion but it is not a formal "legal" exclusion, in those circumstances you would have received a formal letter confirming it and also he would be at home, not at school.
The exclusion regulations say that formal exclusions should not be used for things such as hairstyles only where the behaviour of having extreme hairstyles is persistent and defiant.
You need to find out from the school what are their rules (even if they are not written down - which they should be) and ask about whether all pupils are given internal exclusions for such situations. Could it be that the reasons for the internal isolation are more complicated than just the haircut?
we would internally exclude for that as well, less than no1 is pretty extreme imo
Sounds very strange to not have a policy on hair.
Our school - anything shorter than #2 for boys is a no no.
And the weather is cold - amazed he let you!
My DD's school (also in Essex) has a stated policy of no 'unnatural' hair colours, or internal exclusion, but nothing about LENGTH of hair.
And it seems hit and miss as to whether a child gets put into isolation for unnatural hair colour too. Y7's will definitely get put in iso, Y8 too. Y9 onwards is more subjective, and a dark red or plum is often OK, but a bright pillar box red, or bleached and dyed blue/green/pink will still get put in iso.
DD (Y10) currently has her hair a deep burgundy shade, done at the start of the summer holidays and STILL not faded or grown out much, and nothing has even been mentioned - but that might be because DD lucked into the one form tutor whose hair is a different bright colour each week.
My friend's DD, however, has a really strict form tutor, and was put in iso for two pale pink, washed out streaks in her fringe left over from a weekend dance show...
But for a buzz cut?! Really?!
My DS1 had a one week break and lunchtime isolation because his hair was deemed to be too short. The school said it was too aggressive looking - He had a number 1 cut all over that was not aggressive. He was able to go to lessons with the other children, but not socialise with them at break times.
I was so angry (and aggressive) as it was me who had decided to cut his hair that length and not him. Also it was that length when he started in September and nobody said anything. It was so unfair.
I spoke to the Head of Year three times in the week to express my 'concern' and threaten to escalate this to the Headteacher, but on the Friday they said it had grown sufficiently for him to be able to have his breaks with his friends from the following Monday. How convenient! It did not look any different or less aggressive.
Our school says no shorter than a grade 3, no hair dyes, no shaved patterns etc but it is all written down in the policy documents.
In fairness it does sound like a very extreme hair cut (less than grade 1 is a skin head surely?) so I can see why they aren't happy. Have you asked them to clarify the policy and explain how he will be supervised this week?
This makes me absolutely fume.
As soon as I read the OP, I wondered if the child was black/mixed race. I have seen this punishment meted out to many children of these backgrounds and as far as I can see it's institutionalised racism that for some reason is considered to be acceptable and remains unchallenged.
The children likely to get these styles of haircut are disproportionately black/mixed race/working class/male. The style is considered innappropriate partly because it is associated with these groups.
Exactly how is his (practical, sensible) hairstyle affecting his education or that of other pupils?
If it was my child I would absolutely flip my shit if he was excluded for this, school rules or no. This needs to be challenged more often.
is it in the school rules?
it is at our school.
race is not the issue
stop conflating issues
number 2 or 3 cut is just fine
number 1 cut is provocative in most situations - ESPECIALLY later workplaces ...
Well he's not in a workplace. He's a child, in a school, and entitled to an education.
I'm a teacher. I don't understand all this bullshit about uniform. I think uniforms are a great idea, if they're practical. As it is, I watch children every day operate heavy machinery/cook/draw and write creatively wearing shirts (buttoned up to the top) and ties. Ties ffs! In a workshop!
And then schools just have to go and take it a bit further, often claiming that uniforms help children to prepare for the workplace. Because it's a difficult thing to learn, y'know - wear a tie to work.
What this comes down to, as unfortunately is the case with many English schools today, is marketing. Look how smart our children look! That MUST mean we're doing a good job. Look, OFSTED! They're wearing blazers! God forbid they should get a 'chavvy' haircut like those working class children.
I'm speaking from experience when I say that black/working class children are disproportionately affected by these ridiculous, pointless rules. The 'education' children receive in exclusion is NOT good enough to make up for time they lose in class. I've seen some very vulnerable children punished this way and it makes me very, very angry.
This is what comes of schools that are more interested in outward appearances than they are in children's wellbeing and learning. The best school I ever worked in had a lax uniform code; children came in with their hair dyed every colour under the sun. On one memorable occasion one of my clever, funny, hardworking top set boys came in with neon pink hair. The ethos was inclusive and warm, the discipline was the best I've ever seen and the children were heavily involved in various activities in the local community. The school is in the Good Schools Guide and had fantastic results.
These teachers need to find something more important to occupy their time than writing lists of approved haircuts.
private school parents are able to create connections that state school kids have to find for themselves
sorry, but as an employer and hirer of subcontract firms, piercings, shaving and tattoos all SCREAM intellectual insecurity - and given the choice of 'comfortable' business contacts or 'edgy' ones, edgy lose out every time
skin colour is NOT the issue - my biggest problem is tattoo blue after all.
schools HAVE to make their kids employable - and if you think appearance is not integral to that, you are the problem.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.